Peter Attia· MD
the sweet spot is what maximizes per body part is probably about six to 10 sets in a session okay so they don't really they don't really see in you know improvements above 10 sets
The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
the sweet spot is what maximizes per body part is probably about six to 10 sets in a session okay so they don't really they don't really see in you know improvements above 10 sets
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
the sweet spot is what maximizes per body part is probably about six to 10 sets in a session
you could push your arms shoulders and chest not to 14 or 15 or 20 sets per week but in many cases 25 30 35 sets per week and experience very meaningful growth enhancements that you would never have seen only ever training those 15 sets a week
there's kind of a dose response between number of hard sets you do and muscular growth I mean we've even seen it like specifically in the triceps there was a there was a regression by James creger that even up to like 27 to 45 hard sets per week on triceps produce more muscle growth than I think like 15 to 25 sets per week something like that